Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.22 seconds)Section 32 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 80 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Cit vs Sesa Goa Ltd. on 17 November, 2004
19. The Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court has also referred to
the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. SESA
Goa Limited (2004) 271 ITR 331 (SC) wherein it has been held that
extraction and processing of iron ore amounted to manufacture.
Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs Delhi Press Samachar Patra (P.) Ltd. on 21 March, 2006
16. This issue has come up before the Hon'ble jurisdictional Delhi
High Court in the case of CIT vs. Delhi Press PatraPrakashan
Ltd. (Supra). In this case an issue has arisen whether the assessee
is eligible to claim exemption under section 80-1 of the Income Tax
Act. The assessee's two units were engaged in printing. The raw
materials used were paper, ink and other consumables.
Section 80IC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 9 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
C.I.T vs N.C.Budharaja And Co on 7 September, 1993
The
Supreme Court has also held in the case of N. C. Budharaja &
Co. (supra) that by products, intermediate products and residual
products that emerge in the case of manufacture are also to be
included in the word 'production' or 'produce'. Thus, even if the
printed material as produced by Unit Nos. 2 & 3 is taken as an
intermediate product which requires to be further bound for
making it marketable, the word produce occurring in Section 80-
l(2)(iii) of the Act would include it within its ambit.
Indian Mica & Micanite Industries Ltd vs State Of Bihar & Ors on 2 April, 1971
The Supreme Court noted that the meaning of the word
production was defined only in the Oxford English Dictionary as
"amongst other things that which is produced; a thing that results
from any action, process or effort, a product; a product of human
activity or effort" and this definition has been accepted by the
Supreme Court in an earlier decision in the case ofChrestian
Mica Industries Ltd. v. State of Bihar: [1961] 12 STC 150. The
Court further held that the definition of the word 'production' was
8
ITA No.2130/Del/2014
AY: 2009-10
wide enough to include the production of mineral ores and ores
would fall within the expression "a thing". Having held that the
word "production" was much wider than manufacture, the
Supreme Court felt that it was not necessary to examine the
question whether the mined ore was commercially a new
product. In the present context also, although we have held that
in the facts of this case producing printed paper does amount to
manufacture as a new article or a thing known to market comes
into existence. It is not necessary that an industrial undertaking
must manufacture a commercially new product in order to fulfill
the condition as specified in Section 80-l(2)(iii) of the Act. Since,
in any event production of any article or thing by an industrial
undertaking would be sufficient to entitle the industrial
undertaking to claim that the condition under Section 80-l(2)(iii)
of the Act was fulfilled. Indisputably, printed paper falls within the
meaning of the expression "an article or thing" and whether the
same is marketable as new product is not relevant.
M/S. India Cine Agencies vs Commnr. Of Income Tax, Madras on 12 November, 2008
The
Hon'ble High Court has further relied upon the judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of India Cine Agencies vs. CIT (2009)
308 ITR 98 (SC) relied upon by the learned AR. In this judgment the
Supreme Court has accepted that the meaning of the word
'production or product' was vide enough to include conversion of
jumbo rolls of photographic films into smaller rolls in the desired
sizes.
1